Soliciting opinions of RB shooters - 50mm/4.5 lens

nyoung

Member

Joined

Dec 10, 2006

Messages

388

Format

Medium Format

• Jun 9, 2011

• #1

Been doing some testing on a new - to me - 50mm/4.5 lens. It started me wondering what the RB shooters here consider the optimal aperture for this lens in terms of sharpness at the corners, flare, barrel distortion etc. etc.
Don't be shy, I know everyone has an opinion so share it with the group.

 

Jeff Kubach

Member

Joined

Sep 29, 2007

Messages

6,912

Location

Richmond VA.

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 9, 2011

• #2

For me all of the apertures are good. F8 and above are real good.

Jeff

 

NJS

Member

Joined

Nov 13, 2009

Messages

125

Format

Medium Format

• Jun 9, 2011

• #3

well, I shot it at f/8 and f/11 mostly so I don't know for other f/values. it did very well.

 

BetterSense

Member

Joined

Aug 16, 2008

Messages

3,151

Location

North Caroli

Format

35mm

• Jun 9, 2011

• #4

I've been shooting mine mostly handheld at apertures less than f/8. I haven't been that impressed. I find it annoying to adjust the floating element ring, especially since the camera gives no usable distance readout for you to use...the 50mm distance scale is too imprecise to be useful, so I just have to guess the distance, and half the time I forget.

 

EdSawyer

Member

Joined

Sep 3, 2008

Messages

1,793

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 9, 2011

• #5

f/8 and f/11 are the sharpest before diffraction sets in.

 

BetterSense

Member

Joined

Aug 16, 2008

Messages

3,151

Location

North Caroli

Format

35mm

• Jun 9, 2011

• #6

My 'less than f/8' I mean 'from wide open down to f/8'.

 

Neil Grant

Member

Joined

Jan 30, 2007

Messages

543

Location

area 76

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 9, 2011

• #7

BetterSense said:

I've been shooting mine mostly handheld at apertures less than f/8. I haven't been that impressed. I find it annoying to adjust the floating element ring, especially since the camera gives no usable distance readout for you to use...the 50mm distance scale is too imprecise to be useful, so I just have to guess the distance, and half the time I forget.

Click to expand...

Do you mean f/ numbers less than f/8 (eg f/5.6) or smaller diaphragm openings (eg f/11) It's just not clear. Guessing the distance on the floating ring is good enough - but you're right to say it's easy to forget. I mostly use f/16 for d-o-f. Distortion doesn't change when stopping down and the lens can just cover the 6x8 format - if you've got all the right bits.

 

mr. mohaupt

Member

Joined

Mar 28, 2009

Messages

89

Location

NC

Format

Medium Format

• Jun 9, 2011

• #8

Oh man great thread. I really want this lens, well this or the 65. I didn't realize that the floating element needed to be adjusted to get accurate focusing. Does the 65 have this?

To those that have both which do you find yourself using more? I will probably shoot a handful of landscapes but a lot of "environmental portraits." On my 35mm system my favorite combo is the 17-35 and the 70-200.

Thanks!
~M

 

Maris

Member

Joined

Jan 17, 2006

Messages

1,571

Location

Noosa, Australia

Format

Multi Format

• Jun 10, 2011

• #9

I use a Mamiya RB67 with a 50mm f4.5 lens for most of my landscape photography. The apertures with the most detail for "deep" subjects are f22 and f32 because the generous depth of field eliminates those nasty out of focus areas. The aperture with the finest detail is half way between f8 and f11 for the centre of the image.

The floating element is worth ignoring for ordinary field work. I just set it half way. However if you are doing close-ups of flat art-work at maximum aperture then adjusting the floating element does give you perceptibly (but not dramatically) finer detail in the corners of the image.